EVE Search - Salvage Ship Idea

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Salvage Ship Idea

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.11.01 05:23:00 - [121] Don't like the OP's idea unless you can tractor anyone's wreck. Salvaging should be expanded as a profession, but not a "Hey, I just got done ratting/plexing/missioning, let me collect my extra loot". A specialized salvage ship should be an agile frigate variant with maybe 4 highs and a boost to salvage chance. Originally by: Catharacta My CNR runs on salvager tears.
Sig Sour	Posted - 2008.11.01 07:12:00 - [122] T3 Industrial maybe? I would like an 8 high setup. Less highs is for people hijacking mission wrecks. 8 highs is for people salvaging their own mission. T2 Tractors that pull faster (could keep up with a MWD) would be nice.
Jinserai	Posted - 2008.11.05 18:52:00 - [123] Okay, so I've skimmed through all 5 pages, and didn't see this anywhere, so here goes: The idea of a "Strip salvager" was cool, but producing more material from the same source has balancing issues I would imagine. Instead, have a salvager with a slower cycle time, heftier fitting requirements, and (here's where I get shot) a 1.5k radius AOE. Potential problems: -Running out of cargo space when you have a ton of wrecks around you. Solution: Extra materials are simply lost. Tough. Make sure you have room next time before you tractor 50 wrecks to the same place. -Stealing other peoples wrecks in high spawn rate areas. Solution: Tough. Watch wtf you're doing, or get used to people being ****ed at you. This would also allow for interesting dynamics with salvaging teams. Have a hauler variant that allows for the fitting of one or 2 of these AOE salvagers. Then you have a destroyer fitted for speed with 8 souped up tractors dragging all of the wrecks back into the salvage zone. For some of the higher level missions with wave after wave of ships, salvage teams would be a great way to pull in rookie pilots to get involved, but still have them work together (even if in a small way). Just a random thought.
Maximus Veridia Minmatar Deathguard Legion United Corporations Against Macros	Posted - 2009.01.23 07:04:00 - [124] I'm still waiting for my salvage drones. I think that solves a bunch of issues. you can have 5 drones, that go and salvage wrecks, if you want the mods and other cargo stuff, haul it in with tractors. I know this was on the board, and they even have a skill book out there for it. So what about it CCP?
Caassimolar	Posted - 2009.01.23 15:16:00 - [125] lol range bonus = more salvage thieves EVERYWHERE
Sagacious Z Minmatar Eve University	Posted - 2009.01.25 02:35:00 - [126] Edited by: Sagacious Z on 25/01/2009 02:36:08 There already is such a ship--it is called a destroyer. Why must every ship have a "bonus" to a specific role? Why not just use what is given to us already and create your own role specific ships? Why must many of you wish for changes like you are going to play solo? The "the ship must have 'X' number of high slots for weapons and 'X' number of high slots for tractor beams and 'X' number of high slots for salvagers and 'X' amount of grid and 'X' amount of CPU . . . this is flat out crazy as it takes away tactics and decision making, and takes away the need for a diversity of ships. Why not have just one ship only in EVE that does it all? Is that what you want? There are usually 25,000 to 40,000 or more signed on at any one time? Are you telling me that not one other player in EVE can be approached to provide fighter escort for you while you salvage, or for you to provide hired gun protection services for somebody else who is salvaging? If players want to be solo and so demand a "do it all solo ship", why don't you just go play a game that is you versus the PC and its AI? Why in the world do you play a multi-player game, yet desire all your ships to be solo only in capability? Have you ever thought that the whole idea of EVE from a game designer standpoint is to encourage player interaction? Don't you think that is a key reason why the ships have different capabilities? Why is it that people like you keep requesting that the game design be geared toward solo players? You really need to explain why you want to play solo (or at least, request ship design be geared for solo players), yet you play a game that is a multi-player game designed for player interaction, thus ship diversity.
Navarre Fuego	Posted - 2009.04.14 13:42:00 - [127] I like this idea, and have included it in my ideas about dedicated Science vessels, as the first step on the rung. See my thread here...
DeMichael Crimson Minmatar Republic University	Posted - 2009.04.15 04:44:00 - [128] I like the idea of having a specific ship for salvage with a large cargohold and a bonus to salvage retrieval chance. It should also have a special module which only the Salvage class ship could use, the 'Tractor Net' which would haul/hold all the wrecks placed in it by a Tractor beam. The skill's required to use the salvage ship could include: Primary skills: Industrial 5 Spaceship Command 5 Salvaging 5 Survey 5 Tractoring 5 Secondary skills: All required skills needed for the above skills as well as the required skills for the module's used. The required skills for the 'Tractor Net' module would be all of the required primary skills for the Salvage Ship and can only be fitted on the Salvage Ship. This is just an example and something to think about. Salvage is a big legitimate Industry in the real world and using Destroyer class ships for salvage just doesn't seem right. Destroyers are meant to counter and attack Frigates
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:27:00 - [129] We do not need a ship for every purpose you can possibly think up! /thread And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:30:00 - [130] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom We do not need a ship for every purpose you can possibly think up! /thread We do not need a pointless post for every thread that you can possibly reply to! /continue discussion
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:31:00 - [131] Originally by: Uglok Originally by: AtheistOfDoom We do not need a ship for every purpose you can possibly think up! /thread We do not need a pointless post for every thread that you can possibly reply to! /continue discussion The ships in EVE all have a versatility to them (less so with t2 ships because theyre intentionally niche), so this would have to be t2 and would serve no purpose outside of missions. And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:32:00 - [132] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Originally by: Uglok Originally by: AtheistOfDoom We do not need a ship for every purpose you can possibly think up! /thread We do not need a pointless post for every thread that you can possibly reply to! /continue discussion The ships in EVE all have a versatility to them (less so with t2 ships because theyre intentionally niche), so this would have to be t2 and would serve no purpose outside of missions. And why does that matter to you? Does this really effect the way you play the game so drastically that it would cause you to cancel your subscription because they would add a ship that you may never actually fly, but countless others would? If Tech II ships fit intentionally into their own niche, then why leave this niche vacant?
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:34:00 - [133] Edited by: AtheistOfDoom on 15/04/2009 05:35:06 Edited by: AtheistOfDoom on 15/04/2009 05:34:44 Originally by: Uglok And why does that matter to you? Does this really effect the way you play the game so drastically that it would cause you to cancel your subscription because they would add a ship that you may never actually fly, but countless others would? If Tech II ships fit intentionally into their own niche, then why leave this niche vacant? Because it doesnt need to filled! you can turn any ship you want into a salvager, even frigs and interceptors are used as salvagers. it would be REDUNDANT. And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:41:00 - [134] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Because it doesnt need to filled! you can turn any ship you want into a salvager, even frigs and interceptors are used as salvagers. it would be REDUNDANT. An Assault Ship is redundant. A Heavy Assault Ship is redundant. An Electronic Attack Ship is redundant. An Exhumer is redundant. A Heavy Interdictor is redundant. An Interceptor is redundant. Mining Barges are redundant. Hell, most of Tech II ships would be redundant using your logic, since the Tech I version can easily be fitted for many of these roles. Any frigate can fit weapons, electronic warfare equipment, or web/scramble modules. Any frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battlecruiser, battleship, etc can outfit mining lasers. Mining barges are redundant. A Command Ship is redundant because a Mothership can do the same job as one, but does it better due to it's logistical abilities. Despite not being allowed in High-sec, it can still do the same thing, so using your logic it's still redundant and unnecessary. Your posts on this forum all say the same thing, though using different words to express their meaningless point. They're all redundant, so do us a favor and stop.
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:45:00 - [135] Originally by: Uglok Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Because it doesnt need to filled! you can turn any ship you want into a salvager, even frigs and interceptors are used as salvagers. it would be REDUNDANT. An Assault Ship is redundant. A Heavy Assault Ship is redundant. An Electronic Attack Ship is redundant. An Exhumer is redundant. A Heavy Interdictor is redundant. An Interceptor is redundant. Mining Barges are redundant. Hell, most of Tech II ships would be redundant using your logic, since the Tech I version can easily be fitted for many of these roles. Any frigate can fit weapons, electronic warfare equipment, or web/scramble modules. Any frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battlecruiser, battleship, etc can outfit mining lasers. Mining barges are redundant. A Command Ship is redundant because a Mothership can do the same job as one, but does it better due to it's logistical abilities. Despite not being allowed in High-sec, it can still do the same thing, so using your logic it's still redundant and unnecessary. Your posts on this forum all say the same thing, though using different words to express their meaningless point. They're all redundant, so do us a favor and stop. You dont play much do you? 1. HACs are like battlecruisers with better range and are more maneuverable (same with AFs and cruisers) /niche 2. EAF/recons fill purposes their t1 counterparts dont (see: all of the recons) 3. mining is boring i dont even care 4. CSs get a 15% bonus to warlinks (of a certain type), and are smaller and more useful more often. And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:51:00 - [136] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom You dont play much do you? 1. HACs are like battlecruisers with better range and are more maneuverable (same with AFs and cruisers) /niche 2. EAF/recons fill purposes their t1 counterparts dont (see: all of the recons) 3. mining is boring i dont even care 4. CSs get a 15% bonus to warlinks (of a certain type), and are smaller and more useful more often. Lets see. 1. A normal Cruiser can still do most everything a HAC can do, aside the additional damage. In essence, a HAC is just an upgraded Cruiser. Why is it necessary? It's redundant. We already have Cruisers. Same goes for Assault Ships. 2. Each faction has a single Tech I frigate that is dedicated to EWAR, and I believe they all have Cruisers as well. The Tech II variants make these bonuses stronger, but still the bonuses already exist to begin with. Redundant. 3. Why should something you don't care about not be worthy of your attention? Other people enjoy it. What makes you so special? 4. "More useful more often" is objective. Their only real usefulness in high sec is for missions. In low-sec anywhere they can get to, a Mothership can get to, and it's bonuses are superior. Though it may be larger, it makes a Commandship's bonuses redundant. 5. Come up with better arguments. I'm getting bored.
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 05:56:00 - [137] Originally by: Uglok Lets see. 1. A normal Cruiser can still do most everything a HAC can do, aside the additional damage. In essence, a HAC is just an upgraded Cruiser. Why is it necessary? It's redundant. We already have Cruisers. Same goes for Assault Ships. 2. Each faction has a single Tech I frigate that is dedicated to EWAR, and I believe they all have Cruisers as well. The Tech II variants make these bonuses stronger, but still the bonuses already exist to begin with. Redundant. 3. Why should something you don't care about not be worthy of your attention? Other people enjoy it. What makes you so special? 4. "More useful more often" is objective. Their only real usefulness in high sec is for missions. In low-sec anywhere they can get to, a Mothership can get to, and it's bonuses are superior. Though it may be larger, it makes a Commandship's bonuses redundant. 5. Come up with better arguments. I'm getting bored. no. a cruiser is nowhere near what a HAC is. t2 expands upon the t1 bonuses making them much more useful. I was just saying. Please, please! go to low sec! learn before you speak!(also moms are almost never used over a CS) And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:05:00 - [138] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom no. a cruiser is nowhere near what a HAC is. t2 expands upon the t1 bonuses making them much more useful. I was just saying. Please, please! go to low sec! learn before you speak!(also moms are almost never used over a CS) And another ship would never be used over a salvage dedicated ship either. Whats your point?
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:08:00 - [139] Originally by: Uglok Originally by: AtheistOfDoom no. a cruiser is nowhere near what a HAC is. t2 expands upon the t1 bonuses making them much more useful. I was just saying. Please, please! go to low sec! learn before you speak!(also moms are almost never used over a CS) And another ship would never be used over a salvage dedicated ship either. Whats your point? why do we need one? And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:11:00 - [140] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom why do we need one? Supply and demand. The demand is in the market. Why did we need a HAC? Just so Cruisers can pew pew for more damage?
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:14:00 - [141] Originally by: Uglok Originally by: AtheistOfDoom why do we need one? Supply and demand. The demand is in the market. Why did we need a HAC? Just so Cruisers can pew pew for more damage? I would never buy a 50mil ship just to salvage my wrecks, learn to pvp and stop sayin stupid ****. And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:27:00 - [142] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom I would never buy a 50mil ship just to salvage my wrecks, learn to pvp and stop sayin stupid **. I don't see the title of this game as "AtheistOfDoom-Online", do you? Out of 250 thousand players, do you really matter? Not overly. Why should ANYONE care what you would or wouldn't buy? Other people WOULD buy it, because they'd like to have one to make salvaging easier. It doesn't matter how long it would take for the investment to give a return. That's not up for debate. The ship itself is. If you're going to continue being an *****, then just stop while you're ahead. This isn't High School, so please grow up and act your age. Unless you're in High School, then go do your homework and get to bed while the rest of us enjoy a game.
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:28:00 - [143] Originally by: Uglok Originally by: AtheistOfDoom I would never buy a 50mil ship just to salvage my wrecks, learn to pvp and stop sayin stupid **. I don't see the title of this game as "AtheistOfDoom-Online", do you? Out of 250 thousand players, do you really matter? Not overly. Why should ANYONE care what you would or wouldn't buy? Other people WOULD buy it, because they'd like to have one to make salvaging easier. It doesn't matter how long it would take for the investment to give a return. That's not up for debate. The ship itself is. If you're going to continue being an *****, then just stop while you're ahead. This isn't High School, so please grow up and act your age. Unless you're in High School, then go do your homework and get to bed while the rest of us enjoy a game. ROFL. And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:31:00 - [144] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Originally by: Uglok I don't see the title of this game as "AtheistOfDoom-Online", do you? Out of 250 thousand players, do you really matter? Not overly. Why should ANYONE care what you would or wouldn't buy? Other people WOULD buy it, because they'd like to have one to make salvaging easier. It doesn't matter how long it would take for the investment to give a return. That's not up for debate. The ship itself is. If you're going to continue being an *******, then just stop while you're ahead. This isn't High School, so please grow up and act your age. Unless you're in High School, then go do your homework and get to bed while the rest of us enjoy a game. ROFL. I can respond like a child too. ROFFLE.
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:34:00 - [145] Edited by: AtheistOfDoom on 15/04/2009 06:34:30 Originally by: Uglok I can respond like a child too. ROFFLE. We're all very amazed now go back to your crib and stop internet-stalking me. kthnxbye And then, he killed the dog...
Uglok	Posted - 2009.04.15 06:39:00 - [146] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Edited by: AtheistOfDoom on 15/04/2009 06:34:30 Originally by: Uglok I can respond like a child too. ROFFLE. We're all very amazed now go back to your crib and stop internet-stalking me. kthnxbye Oh wow, that was a MAJOR burn right there. I can feel it engulfing my spirit to the very core. Your pathetic insults are just as pointless as your posts themselves. If you want to attempt to troll a thread, do so at least with style. Don't be a witless twit about it.
NightF0x Gallente Intergalactic League of Terrorists	Posted - 2009.04.15 11:04:00 - [147] will you 2 knock it off. A destroyer is already the near-perfect salvager. 8 highs and plenty of mids to stack full of cap rechargers or injectors. if anything just add bonuses to tractor range and salvager module speed. ------------------------------------
DeMichael Crimson Minmatar Republic University	Posted - 2009.04.15 22:45:00 - [148] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Edited by: AtheistOfDoom on 15/04/2009 06:34:30 Originally by: Uglok I can respond like a child too. ROFFLE. We're all very amazed now go back to your crib and stop internet-stalking me. kthnxbye I think you're in the wrong thread and need to have your eyes checked, might think about getting some reading glasses. Try following your own advice, go to low sec and create your own anti-everything thread. As I said before, Destroyer class ship is supposed to be used to counter/attack frigates, it doesn't have a bonus to salvage nor is it intended to be used as a salvage ship even though a lot of you people use it for that. A specific ship created to do salvage could be used for more that just mission clean up, it could also be used in Fleet wars or used where any large scale encounter has occurred. Players with a ship designed exclusively for salvage could also create another type of business service which both PvP and PvE players could use. Think of it like this, you can load up a car and take some trash to the Dump/Landfill or you can load up a truck and take all of it at once. Bottom line, the majority of players would rather have a truck (specific ship built for salvage) instead of having to use the car (Destroyer's).
Ubiquitous Newt	Posted - 2009.06.23 21:02:00 - [149] Originally by: Riley Craven Wow, your arguement just proves why a speciality ship is needed. You've spent close to 100mil in fittings for a ship that cost 1mil to do your job well. Bravo.[/quote If you consider how much fricking ISK a dedicated salvager makes It's questionable just how unreasonable the cost would be, even if one had to outfit a cat with all this T2 junk, which one does not. I'll be the first to admit that their cargo sucks; on a big mission, I've had to make 3-4 trips to a station to unload. But then, I also made roughly 10-20x what the actual mission rewards were, so one can make the argument that salvaging is too easy as it is.
Photus Caldari Roll For Initiative	Posted - 2009.06.23 21:43:00 - [150] I use a Hurricane; 8 highs, lows filled with CE2, MWD and an AB in the mids. It only has one role, but it handles it incredibly well and is armored enough to deal with the occasional camp and/or NPC. It can typically salvage as fast or faster than my missioning ship can kill 'em. This is typically why I don't think salvage ninjas are a problem; I'm salvaging and looting at the same rate as I'm killing! Instead of going on and on about making a new ship class, why not make a new module type (increase chance of salvage and/or tractor beam range/velocity for group) or implant? If I'm running through space in my Hurricane, people don't immediately think "Hey, I'll bet he ONLY has salvagers and tractors in his highs! Let's go gank a BC." If I was doing the same thing in my "salvage ship", it'd probably be a different story. There are better ways to get bonuses to salvaging than to create a whole new class of ship. It just goes to show you that you shouldn't kneel down in front of the third rail, grab it with both hands, and **** on it from three feet away.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.